Social Norms and the Law: Why Peoples Obey the Law

Abstract

This paper explores the relations between law and social norms and in particular, the case of legal compliance in groups. Specifically, this paper argues that the rule of law is a social norm interfacing the formal institutions of society with the informal ones. As social institutions, norms should also be analyzed at the societal level -a level of analysis that neo-classical economic accounts have failed to address due to fundamental premises of current economic theory. Theories developed in psychology provide a good working framework for social norm analysis in general and of legal compliance (rule of law) in particular. Extant evidence is consistent with the present argument. Forthcoming in the Review of Law and Economics

Social Norms, Social Cohesion, and Corporate Governance

“…In other words, stronger social norms may cause higher social cohesion, which in turn may lead to more open corporate governance; and stronger social norms themselves (either directly or through other mediators) may lead to more open corporate governance. This is consistent with the view of the community members' decision to conform to norms, which is held by legal scholars (David & Brierley, 1985; David & Jauffret‐Spinosi, 2002; Licht, 2008) and economists (Li & Filer, 2007). If norms are perceived to be fair or in everyone's interest, community members will share and follow them; if not, members will choose to rely on private agreements, deviate from public norms and, ultimately, engage in crime.…”

“…One possibility is that community members will choose to adhere to norms if they perceive them as fair or binding, since such norms promote the social well-being and are generally in everyone's interest. This is the view entertained by lawyers (David & Brierley, 1985;Licht, 2008) and economists (Li & Filer, 2007). For example, legal scholars argued that Russians tended to stick to their community norms and evade well-prescribed legal norms due to the fact that these latter have typically been imposed from above and have not been perceived as native or fair (David & Brierley, 1985;David & Jauffret-Spinosi, 2002).…”

“…Total fertility may thus be viewed as an outcome of underlying social norms and used as a good proxy. Social norms and fertility in such research are measured at the group/community level (see Licht, 2008; Thomson & Goldman, 1987). Thus, our measure is defined at the provincial level as the average number of children born to date by a woman older than 15 years.…”

Problematic legal pluralism: causes and some potential ‘cures’

“…McAfee, Mialon, and Mialon (2008) have considered the importance of sequencing in relation to these interactions while Briggs, Huryn, and Mc Bride (1996) and Coffee (1986) have also considered the aggregation of public and private enforcement efforts and jointly determined level of deterrence. Licht (2008) has also considered interactions between the state and groups of norms. 21.…”

On the Behavioral Economics of Crime

“…More generally, because they deter social-norm violations rather than legalnorm violations, shame and guilt operate in tandem with the law's deterrent effect only when social norms overlap with legal norms-that is, when social norms sanction the social harms targeted by legal norms. In well-functioning democracies where people feel committed to policies, legal norms may not only reflect social norms but also strengthen them (Licht, 2008). Note, however, that enforcing a social norm intrinsically through guilt and shame can be more efficient than enforcing an identical legal norm through the extrinsic threat of criminal punishment.…”